Is Della Bosca the only waste of dollars on Macquarie Street?? Do We need an upper house?
July 3rd 2008 01:46
Well the obvious answer is no, but there is not enough time to name all the deadweight on both sides of the NSW parliament, lets take a look at the bigger picture. Many international critics would say that NSW is one of the most micro-governed states in the world. The three levels of government we are subjected to through federal and state parliamens and Local councils are independant and each have overlapping but seperate spheres of control.
The question is this, in this state of over regulation, do we really need a NSW upper house? That is to say, does the benefit that the house provides outweigh the costs to the tax payer and indeed to every voter.
To answer this question objectively the costs need to be identified. Well firstly there is the obvious cost that we have to vote for them. We have to either select the party of our choice or number 21 candidates on the enourmas ballot paper. Not only do we have to vote for them we have to accept that there is virtually no way that we can know the candidates personally. As a bi-product of a party system we are not given a real choice, the party decides who the candidates are and in what order they appear, so all we ca really be sure of is that these people are selected in order of their branch stacking and back scratching skills.
Personal Gripes aside, the financial cost is huge. each MLC is entitled to Basic salary of $126, an Electorate mailout account which is basically a slush fund for postage, their Home fax and phone bills all paid plus Free flights to and from Sydney. This adds up to several hundred thousand dollars a year, reports on Della Bosca estimate that last year the tax payers spent $ 346,521.80 sustaining the humble politician. So its easy to start to get the picture of how much it must be costing taxpayers on payments to politicians alone to sustain the 42 member house. And this isn't taking into account the 3 staff members every MLC is entitled to or the emmployees of the house itself or maintanence and so on...
So what benefit is the millions and millions of dollars purchasing the taxpayers of NSW? Those in favour of the second bearpit would say that it is a house of review, that it provides the checks and balances for the people of NSW to keep the government accountable. But i would pose the question, what checks and balances are being provided in an era where the house is full of party hacks like John Della Bosca and where the majority of members are from the government or government allied parties?
The question is this, in this state of over regulation, do we really need a NSW upper house? That is to say, does the benefit that the house provides outweigh the costs to the tax payer and indeed to every voter.
To answer this question objectively the costs need to be identified. Well firstly there is the obvious cost that we have to vote for them. We have to either select the party of our choice or number 21 candidates on the enourmas ballot paper. Not only do we have to vote for them we have to accept that there is virtually no way that we can know the candidates personally. As a bi-product of a party system we are not given a real choice, the party decides who the candidates are and in what order they appear, so all we ca really be sure of is that these people are selected in order of their branch stacking and back scratching skills.
Personal Gripes aside, the financial cost is huge. each MLC is entitled to Basic salary of $126, an Electorate mailout account which is basically a slush fund for postage, their Home fax and phone bills all paid plus Free flights to and from Sydney. This adds up to several hundred thousand dollars a year, reports on Della Bosca estimate that last year the tax payers spent $ 346,521.80 sustaining the humble politician. So its easy to start to get the picture of how much it must be costing taxpayers on payments to politicians alone to sustain the 42 member house. And this isn't taking into account the 3 staff members every MLC is entitled to or the emmployees of the house itself or maintanence and so on...
So what benefit is the millions and millions of dollars purchasing the taxpayers of NSW? Those in favour of the second bearpit would say that it is a house of review, that it provides the checks and balances for the people of NSW to keep the government accountable. But i would pose the question, what checks and balances are being provided in an era where the house is full of party hacks like John Della Bosca and where the majority of members are from the government or government allied parties?
| 153 |
| Vote |
Add To: 
